Student System. Executive Summary

Transcription

1 Student System Executive Summary The student information system is essential to the success of the university. It supports our $1 billion a year academic operation which is core to our mission. For several years the university administration has discussed and reviewed the viability and risks of our current homegrown student information system, UniverSIS. The probability of some of the key risks has increased to the point the university needs to act. We estimate the project will take 4.5 years from the beginning of the selection process to the live date of the system. Therefore, the university needs to begin the process now. The student system is critical to the University because it: Supports the mission of the university and our ability to achieve 2019 goals Supports students as applicants through alumni Supports the university in being competitive as we aspire to AAU status Is the main student data relationship tool for faculty, students and staff UC s student system needs to be replaced because it: Has antiquated technology that will not be supported by the vendor much longer Is a homegrown system that typically does not make good business sense for research extensive institutions of our size Is not very supportive to the end-user environment Background The student information system supports the mission of the university and is essential in achieving 2019 goals, most specifically those related to enrollment and the work of enhancing student engagement. It is the engine behind the effort. Enrollment management provides enrollment leadership and unified service on the cutting edge of innovation through an empowered staff with students as our core focus. They are committed to aligning university resources for the purpose of achieving and enhancing the quality and diversity of the student body, student engagement and satisfaction, targeted enrollment growth and as a byproduct, enhanced retention and graduation rates. They seek to enrich the educational environment of the University of Cincinnati by stream lining and coordinating the recruitment, admissions, advising, orientation, financial aid, financial literacy, retention, registration, graduation and space utilization in the context of becoming a first-choice destination for students, faculty and staff. In order to achieve these goals we need the ability to take advantage of advances in technology to support innovation and streamline processes. Strong students expect intuitive and 24/7 on-line tools to support their learning and to accomplish the business of being a student. The student information system is the main system that supports services for our students. Students apply, register, receive advising, create their academic plan, request and receive their financial aid, monitor their academic progress, and request to graduate utilizing the student system and they have high expectations for usability and access. Students begin to interact with the system as prospects and applicants to the

2 university, they use it extensively while working towards their degree and the engagement continues through their lives as alumni requesting transcripts or returning for advance degrees and continuing education. We need to remain competitive within our higher education peer group as we aspire to AAU membership. Of the ten AAU universities (refer to Appendix A) most similar to the University of Cincinnati, eight are using a vendor solution, one is developing a homegrown solution utilizing current technology and one is developing a solution using open/shared source. The trend is to move towards vendor ERP systems. We need to make information more accessible to a wider customer/user base in appropriate formats to meet the business or student needs. Core administrative users may be willing to master outdated green screen text-only technology but faculty and students are not. Faculty and advisors use the student information system to monitor progress and record grades. The integration with learning management tools such as Blackboard is essential. Student information registration, financial aid and billing data should integrate real time with our business/financial core system. Current Technical Situation The antiquated 1970 s technology is limiting our ability to take advantage of technology to be innovative. The vendor, Software AG, is following a strategy to move into other technologies to remove its dependency on this consistently declining customer base of Natural and ADABAS technologies. Gartner has recommended since 2005 to migrate away from the technology for the following reasons. It is difficult to find qualified personnel or find talented technicians willing to learn this old technology. The current talent pool is aging and retiring. Many still in the work force have moved into the consulting business raising the cost of available resources. Maintenance costs for the software tools will continue to rise to cover the cost of supporting the technology as the customer base shrinks. At some point it will not be cost effective for the vendor to support the product. The learning curve for new functional staff to become literate and productive (advisors, admissions, registrar, financial aid, bursar) is extended due to the current technology. A home grown system has a consistent set of challenges and disadvantages. A large percentage of our technical resources are devoted to maintenance programming to meet regulatory requirements rather than supporting innovative ideas and making information available to a wider customer base. Commercial solutions provide regular system updates to handle regulatory changes as part of their maintenance agreement. UC does not have any peer institutions to consult and collaborate with on challenges or strategies to solve problems utilizing the student information system. We are alone. In the case of a disaster there are no technical resources in the market that can come in and be able to assist immediately because the system is home grown with little documentation. Our system runs on a mainframe. The Ohio State University has been our back up site until recently when they migrated away from their last mainframe. In the Educause ECAR core data of it shows a trend among the

3 other doctoral research institutions like UC. They are moving away from home grown systems to vendor solutions. Our financial aid system, Financier, from WolffPack is written in the same technology and resides on the mainframe too. The viability of our financial aid system vendor is in question. There are only 11 colleges still using the product. UC is the only one on a mainframe. The support and product updates have recently been problematic. There are only 5 employees left. It has raised concern among all the remaining customers how long the vendor plans to remain in business. The university may be forced to look for a financial aid system separate from a student system. Recommendation As a next step, the project team recommends that a formal project be initiated. Sponsors, an initial project team, timeline and budget need to be identified for the pre-implementation partner selection process. We have surveyed some of our peer institutions for lessons learned from their selection and implementation process. The team s first task will be to conduct a request for proposal (RFP) process to select a pre-implementation partner. An RFP to engage a pre-implementation partner has been prepared. The pre-implementation partner will document as-is and to-be processes, develop requirements and perform a gap analysis between the university functional and technical requirements and the major student information solutions in the market. The evaluation will include all the functions that comprise a student information system such as: Prospecting, admissions, transfer credit evaluation, financial aid, student records, degree audit, registration, class room scheduling, advising, student billing, cashiering, collections, loan processing, health insurance A report will be provided showing the compelling differences between the alternatives and a ranking of the best alternatives for the university taking into account all the standard factors in selecting a system and integration with current university ERP systems. The pre-implementation partner will also perform a readiness assessment of the university s current preparedness to perform a system implementation and recommend appropriate actions needed to successfully undertake the implementation of a recommended solution. This should include technical, financial, functional, personnel, organizational and cultural factors. These exercises are estimated to take about 8 months. The requirements and readiness phase will stop before advancing to a final decision phase. Once requirements, gap analysis and institutional readiness are complete, recommendations and approvals will need to take place before embarking on a product and implementation partner selection process.

4 Board approval will be sought before proceeding to select a product and implementation partner. If the university s existing ERP system, SAP proves to make the most sense as a SIS solution for the university and it is determined by the leadership of the university to be the best alternative we will be in the position to start negotiations. If not, the pre-implementation partner will assist in preparing an RFP for a new SIS. We will then evaluate and select a leading solution. Next we will prepare an RFP for an implementation partner, evaluate and select the implementation partner. We estimate the selection process of a student system to take up to 10 months. The actual implementation project will take about three years. The next steps have been approved by the Executive Technology Strategy Committee (ETSC), Academic Operations Committee (AOC) and the Fiscal Coordinating Committee (FCC). A draft RFP is developed to find a consulting partner. A project charter is being drafted and project sponsors will be identified to form the project and team. Then the RFP will be confirmed and advertised.

5 Appendix A List of AAU universities that are most similar to the University of Cincinnati: a. University of Iowa homegrown SIS b. University of Kansas - vendor solution for SIS c. University of Michigan-Ann Arbor - vendor solution for SIS d. SUNY at Buffalo - vendor solution for SIS e. Stony Brook University - vendor solution for SIS f. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill - vendor solution for SIS g. Ohio State University - vendor solution for SIS h. University of Pittsburgh - vendor solution for SIS i. University of Virginia - vendor solution for SIS j. University of Washington-Seattle Campus founding member of Kuali Student